Agricultural Credit Societies: Establish status for TDS exemption. Stay on interest list pending Supreme Court decision.

The court directed the petitioners, Primary Agricultural Credit Societies, to establish their status within three months to claim exemption from TDS and comply with Section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act. The requirement to furnish a list of interest exceeding Rs. 5000 was stayed pending a Supreme Court decision, while the petitioners were mandated to fulfill other statutory obligations under Section 200(3).

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Compliance with statutory requirements under Section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act.
2. Furnishing of a list showing interest credited/accrued in excess of Rs. 5000.
3. Furnishing copies of provisional receipts and Form No.16 and 16A.
4. Classification and status of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies and their exemption from TDS under Section 194A.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Compliance with statutory requirements under Section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act:
The petitioners, Primary Co-operative Societies/Primary Agricultural Credit Societies, were issued notices by the Income Tax Officer (TDS) to comply with Section 200(3) of the Income Tax Act, which mandates the submission of statements in Form 24Q/26Q/27Q. The petitioners argued that these notices amounted to a general enquiry under Section 133(6) of the Act, which had been stayed by the Supreme Court in a similar case (SLP.3976 of 2010). The respondents clarified that the notices were not under Section 133(6) but for assessment purposes due to the petitioners' failure to file necessary returns and effect TDS as prescribed.

2. Furnishing of a list showing interest credited/accrued in excess of Rs. 5000:
The petitioners objected to furnishing a list of interest credited/accrued in excess of Rs. 5000, arguing that it constituted a general information request under Section 133(6) and required prior approval of the Director. The court noted that similar notices had been stayed by the Supreme Court and held that the requirement to furnish such a list could only be enforced subject to the outcome of the pending Supreme Court decision. The court emphasized that the burden of generating such a list should not be shifted to the petitioners.

3. Furnishing copies of provisional receipts and Form No.16 and 16A:
The petitioners did not object to the requirement to furnish copies of provisional receipts issued by the NSDL office and Form No.16 and 16A. The court noted that these requirements were part of the statutory obligations under Section 200(3) and did not warrant any interference.

4. Classification and status of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies and their exemption from TDS under Section 194A:
The petitioners contended that as Primary Agricultural Credit Societies, they were exempt from TDS under Section 194A(3)(viia)(a) of the Income Tax Act. They argued that their classification as such societies was certified by the competent state authority and should not be questioned by the Income Tax Department. The respondents argued that many societies wrongly claimed benefits under Section 80P without meeting the criteria for Primary Agricultural Credit Societies. The court held that the petitioners must substantiate their status by obtaining certificates from the competent authority, demonstrating that their principal objective of providing agricultural credit was being fulfilled. If the petitioners could establish their status, they would be exempt from TDS and the requirements of Section 200(3). The court allowed the petitioners three months to produce the necessary certificates, failing which the Income Tax Department could proceed with further steps.

Conclusion:
The court disposed of the writ petitions by directing the petitioners to establish their status as Primary Agricultural Credit Societies within three months to claim exemption from TDS and compliance with Section 200(3). The requirement to furnish a list of interest credited/accrued in excess of Rs. 5000 was stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision. The petitioners were required to comply with other statutory obligations under Section 200(3).

---